From: Joseph Maurer (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Wed Sep 15 2004 - 17:29:15 BST
On 8 September 7:10 PM Scott writes to Joe:
[Scott:] What is your basis for believing that "awareness [is] a product of evolution"? That is a belief which my argument is an attempt to subvert. If SQ are universals, then creation of new SQ is what we call intellect, which involves awareness. The alternative to this is to assume that all change until there were humans was mechanical.
Hi Scott and all,
joe: I attempted to respond some time ago, but the post hasn't made it to moq.org yet. I think that was a fortuitous 'hasn't made'. I find myself sitting and staring at the computer trying to find formulations for what I consider my experience to be. The first post was a knee-jerk response. I am not going to try to resubmit it and if it shows up ignore it.
My acceptance of "awareness" comes from questioning my actions based on my knowledge:
What I do is not what I want to do. I can't make something higher or lower in evolutionary value outside of myself. I do not question the value of evolutionary levels. I create myself. I conclude my self-awareness is separate from evolution, but somehow connected.
Betterness! I see people I consider better than me, I assume they have controlled their self-awareness. Frank Herbert in Destination Void tells the story of trying to make the computer of a space ship self-aware. I was fascinated by the story and became convinced that computers were not self-aware. Self-awareness was separate from their construction.
I can become more aware. I can not hit a 95 mph fastball for average. Another can! Action and awareness can be disciplined.
I conclude that my awareness is individual yet tied to evolution. IMO self-awareness flows from the preferences in chaos. (I hope that is vague enough.)
[Scott] I don't follow the rest of this, in particular, what you mean by a "mystical connection".
joe: ordinarily I use 'mystical connection' when I cannot explain something in words of evolution!
Aristotle proposed a science beyond physics. It was called metaphysics based on abstraction. Unfortunately Pirsig put his new wine into the old 'metaphysical' wineskin. IMO the connection between undefined qualities, and the connection between undefined quality and physics would more properly be called mysticphysics of quality.
As much as Matt Kundert claimed that there was no connection between the undefined and physics, yet by supporting 'intersubjective' agreement, he agreed to something.
A mystical science? A science of vibrations? Beyond words! Beauty, that which upon being experienced pleases! I have an itch I can't scratch! The sweet spot!
Joe.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 15 2004 - 17:29:11 BST